On April 15 2016 06:43 PPN wrote: This is what Blizzard should have written first before taking any actions. Better late than never I guess but what a shameful series of events.
Now as for the content of the statement itself, I'm still not sold. Blizzard refusing to publish evidence and players staying silent or still claiming innocence, not sure who I should trust. The mess has yet to be cleaned up.
Why is it shameful? Some participants of a tournament was found by the organizors to be in breach of their regulations and got punished. Why do you have the right to any information at all besides that?
Two out of three have admited to the charge so in the absolute worst case scenario they got it 66,6% right.
Why do you have to word it in "right"? So if it's not their obligation I should not ask them to do what I think is the right way to do things? I am their fan and their customer. I don't like the methods they used ie. shooting first and asking questions later and being vague as hell in their statement. I have every right to tell it to their face. I have no clue why you are so antagonistic. If you don't like my view, get lost man.
P.S.: no word about Bly. I nearly forgot.
Why is it "right" for them to share information with you? You are not the judge on this case, what you think is frankly irrelevant. They conducted a investegation, found the evidence sufficient to punish the players in question and did so. Why do you think you have right to any information besides that?
They were'nt "shoot first and asking questions later". They conducted a investegation, came to a conclusion and acted on that conclusion.
You are not "telling it to their face", you are on a internet forum demanding information to a investegation you are not a part of.
They did shoot first and ask questions later. Major was not even contacted beforehand either for questions or even for being notified about the punishement. They were unlikely done with investigating too when they took actions otherwise there is no reason it would take them a week to write a full statement. They even stated that the investigation was "ongoing" and used a very strong and meaningful word "match-fixing". The way Blizzard handled the case regardless of whether you agree with their conclusion is so full of bullshit, I don't know how this is defendable. Sure Major's reputation is pretty well known but this is not enough to condamn him. I have no reason to believe Blizzard either with so many signs of screw up, especially when Major is the only convicted while others get out with nothing or just a warning. Until proven wrong by overwhelming evidence, I am not buying their side of the story because I believe in presumption of innocence. As if wintrading can happen alone, and if leaving game is unfair, then anyone leaving game is suspicious and should be investigated. Their ruling is vague and credibility on this case thin as hell.
I am on an Internet forum that is read by Blizzard employees as shown multiple times in the past. So yeah I am telling to their face, the only public way to be more direct would be to write an email to them.
And again how about you stop antagonizing people who ask for transparency? God forbids me for thinking something is wrong and asking for that. I disagree with you and Blizzard's way on this case, I'm entitled to my opinion and the ability to voice it, get off people's back trying to make them think otherwise.
They conducted an investigation, came to a conclusion and handed out a punishment. That is the order it was done in and it is the order it should be done in. Contacting Major, if you believe him when he says they didn't, is not needed if they have sufficient evidence and it is not needed to come to a conclusion. So why woul that be required of them?
You do realize it is entirely possible to conclude that one person is guilty while contuing the investigantion into toher players? They were not looking only into Major but into other players as well.
How is it not defensible? What did they do wrong?
Major is not the only one who got convicted, SnD and MrineLord was as well, and they both admited it. So we know Blizzard was right.
They don't have to prove anything to you. You are not the judge in this case, and I'm not sure why you think this should be a trial by public opinion? Why do you think Blizzard needs to answer to you befor taking actions? Are you somehow in charge of Blizzards decisions.
How is the credibility thin? Two of the three people convicted admited it and Major himself admited to leaving games and sharing a account involved in match fixing.
Please, you are offended by someone disagreeing with you? If you can't handle that, don't poste on a public forum.
Dude. I'm not offended. Feel free to disagree. Just do whatever you want except telling me what I should think and say. I say they're wrong. Deal with it.
On April 16 2016 06:01 Blargh wrote: However, it still seems like it would promote playing tons and tons of games, with quantity having more impact over quality (aka, # of games more important than winrate). I really don't know if there's a way to use a ladder-like system without it favoring playing a shit-ton of games.
There are also automatic tournaments available. Just don't make the process too focused on a single method or a single date (weekdays are always problematic).
This goes hand in hand with creating a CLOSED "GM" clone for the duration of the ladder, where only the invited accounts (basically anyone in GM that is not a barcode) are included, and they can ONLY play against one another (hint for blizzard: you already did that 10 years ago with the closed TFT ladder, I guess the technology "just isn't here yet?").
Great and exciting idea !
What would be the point of an open ladder competition then? Cuz that's what this is supposed to be after all. Like when QXC, despite being long retired, finished top-16 just to see if he could do it.
Edit: Or was the open part of the ladder competition only applied to the start of WCS?
I do not believe the suggested idea necessarily has to go against that. I think any player should be able to enter the separate ladder qualifier, so long as they are eligible (just like every other qualifier ever?). This has the downside of not invigorating the ladder for that period, but it should make for a really exciting qualifier system.
However, it still seems like it would promote playing tons and tons of games, with quantity having more impact over quality (aka, # of games more important than winrate). I really don't know if there's a way to use a ladder-like system without it favoring playing a shit-ton of games.
Perhaps, it would at least eliminate people form having multiple accounts in play.
Any old timers around to confirm this deja vu feeling I've been having that the WCS ladder competitions is patterned after the TSL 2 qualifierson ICCUP?
Funny how trying to call back to that just gets everyone pointing out how bad the system is. Then again TSL had a bunch of players thrown out for trying to game the ladder then too.
This goes hand in hand with creating a CLOSED "GM" clone for the duration of the ladder, where only the invited accounts (basically anyone in GM that is not a barcode) are included, and they can ONLY play against one another (hint for blizzard: you already did that 10 years ago with the closed TFT ladder, I guess the technology "just isn't here yet?").
Great and exciting idea !
What would be the point of an open ladder competition then? Cuz that's what this is supposed to be after all. Like when QXC, despite being long retired, finished top-16 just to see if he could do it.
Edit: Or was the open part of the ladder competition only applied to the start of WCS?
I do not believe the suggested idea necessarily has to go against that. I think any player should be able to enter the separate ladder qualifier, so long as they are eligible (just like every other qualifier ever?). This has the downside of not invigorating the ladder for that period, but it should make for a really exciting qualifier system.
However, it still seems like it would promote playing tons and tons of games, with quantity having more impact over quality (aka, # of games more important than winrate). I really don't know if there's a way to use a ladder-like system without it favoring playing a shit-ton of games.
Perhaps, it would at least eliminate people form having multiple accounts in play.
Any old timers around to confirm this deja vu feeling I've been having that the WCS ladder competitions is patterned after the TSL 2 qualifierson ICCUP?
Funny how trying to call back to that just gets everyone pointing out how bad the system is. Then again TSL had a bunch of players thrown out for trying to game the ladder then too.
Difference being we were transparent with the information. I don't recall anyone protesting like Major has done.
This goes hand in hand with creating a CLOSED "GM" clone for the duration of the ladder, where only the invited accounts (basically anyone in GM that is not a barcode) are included, and they can ONLY play against one another (hint for blizzard: you already did that 10 years ago with the closed TFT ladder, I guess the technology "just isn't here yet?").
Great and exciting idea !
What would be the point of an open ladder competition then? Cuz that's what this is supposed to be after all. Like when QXC, despite being long retired, finished top-16 just to see if he could do it.
Edit: Or was the open part of the ladder competition only applied to the start of WCS?
I do not believe the suggested idea necessarily has to go against that. I think any player should be able to enter the separate ladder qualifier, so long as they are eligible (just like every other qualifier ever?). This has the downside of not invigorating the ladder for that period, but it should make for a really exciting qualifier system.
However, it still seems like it would promote playing tons and tons of games, with quantity having more impact over quality (aka, # of games more important than winrate). I really don't know if there's a way to use a ladder-like system without it favoring playing a shit-ton of games.
Perhaps, it would at least eliminate people form having multiple accounts in play.
Any old timers around to confirm this deja vu feeling I've been having that the WCS ladder competitions is patterned after the TSL 2 qualifierson ICCUP?
Funny how trying to call back to that just gets everyone pointing out how bad the system is. Then again TSL had a bunch of players thrown out for trying to game the ladder then too.
Difference being we were transparent with the information. I don't recall anyone protesting like Major has done.
Since I got someone in the know, did you guys have lawyers involved then? Cuz they tend to have a weird influence on things.
Back to the memory lane, I do remember a lot of non-players were skeptical about the ability to track players via replay keystrokes / keybinds / ect. Scene was a lot more tight knit then too and I remember most people 'fessed up once they were caught. But I was only barely following starcraft then so what do I know?
This goes hand in hand with creating a CLOSED "GM" clone for the duration of the ladder, where only the invited accounts (basically anyone in GM that is not a barcode) are included, and they can ONLY play against one another (hint for blizzard: you already did that 10 years ago with the closed TFT ladder, I guess the technology "just isn't here yet?").
Great and exciting idea !
What would be the point of an open ladder competition then? Cuz that's what this is supposed to be after all. Like when QXC, despite being long retired, finished top-16 just to see if he could do it.
Edit: Or was the open part of the ladder competition only applied to the start of WCS?
I do not believe the suggested idea necessarily has to go against that. I think any player should be able to enter the separate ladder qualifier, so long as they are eligible (just like every other qualifier ever?). This has the downside of not invigorating the ladder for that period, but it should make for a really exciting qualifier system.
However, it still seems like it would promote playing tons and tons of games, with quantity having more impact over quality (aka, # of games more important than winrate). I really don't know if there's a way to use a ladder-like system without it favoring playing a shit-ton of games.
Perhaps, it would at least eliminate people form having multiple accounts in play.
Any old timers around to confirm this deja vu feeling I've been having that the WCS ladder competitions is patterned after the TSL 2 qualifierson ICCUP?
Funny how trying to call back to that just gets everyone pointing out how bad the system is. Then again TSL had a bunch of players thrown out for trying to game the ladder then too.
Difference being we were transparent with the information. I don't recall anyone protesting like Major has done.
Since I got someone in the know, did you guys have lawyers involved then? Cuz they tend to have a weird influence on things.
Back to the memory lane, I do remember a lot of non-players were skeptical about the ability to track players via replay keystrokes / keybinds / ect. Scene was a lot more tight knit then too and I remember most people 'fessed up once they were caught. But I was only barely following starcraft then so what do I know?
Hotbid was our lawyer most people were caught by IP matching.
On April 16 2016 09:42 Jj_82 wrote: Bad guy Blizzard could've warned everyone beforehand. Prevent drama.
Warned everyone to, what.. not cheat?
I think the rulebook they released could be considered "warning."
Yeah, but even the rulebook contained very general guidelines. I think the problem here is that the ladder is a very unique environment compared to standard bracket qualifiers and the like. While you can fault people for failing to read the rulebook, there really needs to be warnings and rather than having such a severe punishment, simply booting them from qualification is sufficient. That is an appropriate warning and punishment for this kind of thing. Then, they can make an official followup to it saying that future tournaments, including ladder qualifiers, will be more strict, and they can CLEARLY go over what kind of behavior is not appropriate, while also giving an idea of what kind of punishment would ensue.
Players do do dumb things sometimes, but it's really important to make sure that players understand both the rules and the consequences. When using something like the ladder, where people are already used to doing things, like not caring about leaving matches, and testing stuff, because, let's be real, that's actually what the ladder is good for, they need to go out of their way to establish a ruleset and appropriate behavior for that kind of thing. They should be specifically stating that boosting an account, and using shared accounts during this period, and insta-leaving games are simply not allowed...
It's just a lot better to be more lenient on rules when trying new things. Once Blizzard has established a clear set of expectations and rules that apply to this kind of qualifier, they can dish out the harsher punishments. Now, I don't think what they did to MarineLord is like, horribly unfair, but I'd still actually put it on the "harsh" side of things. And Major got screwed just as hard, despite doing, in my opinion, a much less significant "crime".
I just hope that Blizzard is able to see their faults here, cause I don't think they want bad things for the Starcraft scene, but they make some rather poor choices sometimes, and it's a pity because I'm pretty sure they are putting more money in than they are getting out of it with SC2 Esports.
Yeah, but even the rulebook contained very general guidelines. I think the problem here is that the ladder is a very unique environment compared to standard bracket qualifiers and the like. While you can fault people for failing to read the rulebook, there really needs to be warnings and rather than having such a severe punishment, simply booting them from qualification is sufficient. That is an appropriate warning and punishment for this kind of thing. Then, they can make an official followup to it saying that future tournaments, including ladder qualifiers, will be more strict, and they can CLEARLY go over what kind of behavior is not appropriate, while also giving an idea of what kind of punishment would ensue.
Players do do dumb things sometimes, but it's really important to make sure that players understand both the rules and the consequences. When using something like the ladder, where people are already used to doing things, like not caring about leaving matches, and testing stuff, because, let's be real, that's actually what the ladder is good for, they need to go out of their way to establish a ruleset and appropriate behavior for that kind of thing. They should be specifically stating that boosting an account, and using shared accounts during this period, and insta-leaving games are simply not allowed...
It's just a lot better to be more lenient on rules when trying new things. Once Blizzard has established a clear set of expectations and rules that apply to this kind of qualifier, they can dish out the harsher punishments. Now, I don't think what they did to MarineLord is like, horribly unfair, but I'd still actually put it on the "harsh" side of things. And Major got screwed just as hard, despite doing, in my opinion, a much less significant "crime".
I just hope that Blizzard is able to see their faults here, cause I don't think they want bad things for the Starcraft scene, but they make some rather poor choices sometimes, and it's a pity because I'm pretty sure they are putting more money in than they are getting out of it with SC2 Esports.
They win traded, to gain rank. How can you even say that's just the player doing a "dumb thing". No, it's the player cheating to gain ladder rank to get into the qualifier. It's that simple. Marinelord is 20 years old and Major is 23 years old, they are both old enough to know that doing shit like that is cheating.
"Well, I just stole a loaf of bread, it's only a 99 cent item, but please don't punish me because I do dumb things sometimes" Nope, you're still going to get prosecuted and either get fined/community service or jail time depending on your age. With this point, it's basically, you cheat to manipulate WCS ranking, why not delete all the ranking they were trying to manipulate.
At 23 and 20 you should god damn know better.
Rulebook or not, wintrading to gain rank is fucking stupid and should be punished severely.
On April 16 2016 09:42 Jj_82 wrote: Bad guy Blizzard could've warned everyone beforehand. Prevent drama.
Warned everyone to, what.. not cheat?
I think the rulebook they released could be considered "warning."
Yes, let's talk about the rulebook that was released 24 hours before the incriminated games were played and that contains no indication of which punishment is applied to a given rulebreak.
Stop defending these people. They are educated and knew exactly what they were doing. The game is better off without them and so is the scene.
There are far to many Blizzard haters around and they will use any excuse to lash out at the company. This is Blizzards tournament and Blizzards money promoting this. The rules are there and all the players know them before they participate
If you dont like the rules, don't participate. If want to cheat well fine, do so but when you get caught dont bitch like a 10 year old running to mama for help.
Have any of you considered that money may have changed hands for win trading. Where there is money there is corruption. These players should never get a game in a tournament again as far as i am concerned
On April 16 2016 15:30 Topdoller wrote: Stop defending these people. They are educated and knew exactly what they were doing. The game is better off without them and so is the scene.
There are far to many Blizzard haters around and they will use any excuse to lash out at the company. This is Blizzards tournament and Blizzards money promoting this. The rules are there and all the players know them before they participate
If you dont like the rules, don't participate. If want to cheat well fine, do so but when you get caught dont bitch like a 10 year old running to mama for help.
Have any of you considered that money may have changed hands for win trading. Where there is money there is corruption. These players should never get a game in a tournament again as far as i am concerned
Most of the criticism is not about the punishment, but about the criteria for deciding who will recieve the punishment (and previous establishment of that)
I don't think "defending" is quite the right word. I mean, we all know MarineLord is guilty, and Major is somewhat guilty, but not reeaaally guilty. We don't have much more information than that.
But some of us think that there are better ways of punishing the players and responding to this kind of thing. Once again, the rules aren't even that clear. I don't think Major was losing matches to qualify anyone. You can call him a cheater, but that's pretty silly. MarineLord, on the other hand, made a public statement about it, so...
Of course, qualifying for the thing nets them $400 straight up, so it's clearly not okay to win-trade to get there. I don't think anyone has even tried to argue that point. But it's a vulnerable system, and it's also not really as clean-cut as throwing games in a bracket format. If you guys remember, or looked at the link I mentioned earlier, involving the Byun vs Coca match to qualify for Code A, those ended up both being fairly well-respected players. Byun is actually a pretty solid player now, despite only playing on a Chinese team. They got punished for it, but just like this, it was for a qualifier, and not a huge amount was on the line. Does that make it ok? Nope, but it also doesn't mean that a perma-ban is the appropriate response either.
Also yes, as OW mentions... They literally released the rules, which does not even talk extensively about scenarios like this, until the day BEFORE the thing happened. Like, maybe the players had access to it for a while? But, let's be real.... They probably didn't, and they probably didn't even get a notice anywhere saying it was released.
I'm glad Blizzard is concerned with the integrity of their tournament, but they handled the situation, and really, the whole qualifier in a poor manner.
This goes hand in hand with creating a CLOSED "GM" clone for the duration of the ladder, where only the invited accounts (basically anyone in GM that is not a barcode) are included, and they can ONLY play against one another (hint for blizzard: you already did that 10 years ago with the closed TFT ladder, I guess the technology "just isn't here yet?").
Great and exciting idea !
What would be the point of an open ladder competition then? Cuz that's what this is supposed to be after all. Like when QXC, despite being long retired, finished top-16 just to see if he could do it.
Edit: Or was the open part of the ladder competition only applied to the start of WCS?
I think this could be prevented adding a few days of pre-ladder, and the possibility at any time to "apply" through the BNet platform (this could be available only to people that have been GM on their account once in the past - don't kid yourself, someone that has never made GM once has no chance to be amongst the last 16). The 200 person requirement of GM doesn't need to be reproduced. The problem with ladder qualifications is that it's impossible to make a flawless system. In my post, I mostly addressed the issue of players that are already through and screw the competitions. A downside you'll never get rid of is people that are in, but have no chance to go through anymore that can rig the competition towards the end. I think these people deserve to be punished just as hard, such as ShaDown, whose behavior is entirely despicable (what's the point of rigging something just to rig it? are you 12yo dude? at least the other guys had some incentive). Maybe tweaking the matchmaking system in the last few hours such that you meet with higher priority people close to your rank. I believe this would work decently as the ladder is super active in the last few hours (last day in general). Once more, no one system is perfect, and you would expect adults not to rig a goddamn qualifier for a qualifier, in the end, only 2 players make it so maybe focus on your own performance instead...
On April 16 2016 09:42 Jj_82 wrote: Bad guy Blizzard could've warned everyone beforehand. Prevent drama.
Warned everyone to, what.. not cheat?
I think the rulebook they released could be considered "warning."
Yes, let's talk about the rulebook that was released 24 hours before the incriminated games were played and that contains no indication of which punishment is applied to a given rulebreak.
So you just go yolo then and hope for a not so bad punishment? If you cheated and get caught you deal with the consequences.
On April 15 2016 06:43 PPN wrote: This is what Blizzard should have written first before taking any actions. Better late than never I guess but what a shameful series of events.
Now as for the content of the statement itself, I'm still not sold. Blizzard refusing to publish evidence and players staying silent or still claiming innocence, not sure who I should trust. The mess has yet to be cleaned up.
Why is it shameful? Some participants of a tournament was found by the organizors to be in breach of their regulations and got punished. Why do you have the right to any information at all besides that?
Two out of three have admited to the charge so in the absolute worst case scenario they got it 66,6% right.
Why do you have to word it in "right"? So if it's not their obligation I should not ask them to do what I think is the right way to do things? I am their fan and their customer. I don't like the methods they used ie. shooting first and asking questions later and being vague as hell in their statement. I have every right to tell it to their face. I have no clue why you are so antagonistic. If you don't like my view, get lost man.
P.S.: no word about Bly. I nearly forgot.
Why is it "right" for them to share information with you? You are not the judge on this case, what you think is frankly irrelevant. They conducted a investegation, found the evidence sufficient to punish the players in question and did so. Why do you think you have right to any information besides that?
They were'nt "shoot first and asking questions later". They conducted a investegation, came to a conclusion and acted on that conclusion.
You are not "telling it to their face", you are on a internet forum demanding information to a investegation you are not a part of.
They did shoot first and ask questions later. Major was not even contacted beforehand either for questions or even for being notified about the punishement. They were unlikely done with investigating too when they took actions otherwise there is no reason it would take them a week to write a full statement. They even stated that the investigation was "ongoing" and used a very strong and meaningful word "match-fixing". The way Blizzard handled the case regardless of whether you agree with their conclusion is so full of bullshit, I don't know how this is defendable. Sure Major's reputation is pretty well known but this is not enough to condamn him. I have no reason to believe Blizzard either with so many signs of screw up, especially when Major is the only convicted while others get out with nothing or just a warning. Until proven wrong by overwhelming evidence, I am not buying their side of the story because I believe in presumption of innocence. As if wintrading can happen alone, and if leaving game is unfair, then anyone leaving game is suspicious and should be investigated. Their ruling is vague and credibility on this case thin as hell.
I am on an Internet forum that is read by Blizzard employees as shown multiple times in the past. So yeah I am telling to their face, the only public way to be more direct would be to write an email to them.
And again how about you stop antagonizing people who ask for transparency? God forbids me for thinking something is wrong and asking for that. I disagree with you and Blizzard's way on this case, I'm entitled to my opinion and the ability to voice it, get off people's back trying to make them think otherwise.
They conducted an investigation, came to a conclusion and handed out a punishment. That is the order it was done in and it is the order it should be done in. Contacting Major, if you believe him when he says they didn't, is not needed if they have sufficient evidence and it is not needed to come to a conclusion. So why woul that be required of them?
You do realize it is entirely possible to conclude that one person is guilty while contuing the investigantion into toher players? They were not looking only into Major but into other players as well.
How is it not defensible? What did they do wrong?
Major is not the only one who got convicted, SnD and MrineLord was as well, and they both admited it. So we know Blizzard was right.
They don't have to prove anything to you. You are not the judge in this case, and I'm not sure why you think this should be a trial by public opinion? Why do you think Blizzard needs to answer to you befor taking actions? Are you somehow in charge of Blizzards decisions.
How is the credibility thin? Two of the three people convicted admited it and Major himself admited to leaving games and sharing a account involved in match fixing.
Please, you are offended by someone disagreeing with you? If you can't handle that, don't poste on a public forum.
Dude. I'm not offended. Feel free to disagree. Just do whatever you want except telling me what I should think and say. I say they're wrong. Deal with it.
Usually ones opinion is made on the basis of facts and arguments. I have presented mine for why I think yours is wrong and you seem completly unable to come up with a argument supporting your own point of view.
EPT
most people were caught by IP matching. 
