|
United States33586 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm didn't really care too much when I saw the initial claims.
Hard to imagine individuals that partake in scummy actions in the first place showing genuine penitence rather than seeking some kind of revenge.
Removal is more than justified, regardless if it was a one time offense or habitual
|
United States33586 Posts
I'm not particularly familiar with ESIC outside of ESL leaning on them for anti-corruption in Counter-Strike.
What's the chance they complete a thorough, full investigation and give us a conclusion we can trust?
|
On June 17 2025 01:27 Waxangel wrote:
I'm not particularly familiar with ESIC outside of ESL leaning on them for anti-corruption in Counter-Strike.
What's the chance they complete a thorough, full investigation and give us a conclusion we can trust?
Probably 0%
Not worth anyone's time. Also for relative paltry sums of money it sadly isn't even worth pursuing. (Multi country, legal fees, etc.)
I would say best case scenario is they can track down whoever is heading it but even then there isn't a win. If he's Chinese nothing will happen given that the pursuing bodies are in the UK and Aussieland. Since there is nothing to recoup the only thing you'd be gaining is "hopefully" preventing him from repeating, which is unlikely plus probably not going to draw any extra awareness than is already out there now.
|
United States33586 Posts
On June 17 2025 01:57 Agh wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2025 01:27 Waxangel wrote:
I'm not particularly familiar with ESIC outside of ESL leaning on them for anti-corruption in Counter-Strike.
What's the chance they complete a thorough, full investigation and give us a conclusion we can trust? Probably 0% Not worth anyone's time. Also for relative paltry sums of money it sadly isn't even worth pursuing. (Multi country, legal fees, etc.) I would say best case scenario is they can track down whoever is heading it but even then there isn't a win. If he's Chinese nothing will happen given that the pursuing bodies are in the UK and Aussieland. Since there is nothing to recoup the only thing you'd be gaining is "hopefully" preventing him from repeating, which is unlikely plus probably not going to draw any extra awareness than is already out there now.
I'm asking about ESIC in particular from anyone who is familiar with what they do, because ostensibly they take fees from various tournaments and esports related organizations so they can be a serious body that does things 'properly.'
Yes, it's likely that in a total vacuum low-stakes match-fixing/crime will go unchecked, which is why I was curious about the involvement of a larger industry body 
|
On June 17 2025 01:27 Waxangel wrote:
I'm not particularly familiar with ESIC outside of ESL leaning on them for anti-corruption in Counter-Strike.
What's the chance they complete a thorough, full investigation and give us a conclusion we can trust?
I think the ESIC is relatively thorough. They will take some time to investigate, but they usually in the end present some findings and put out bans - though I'm not sure if there are any real "legal actions" involved beyond that.
However, that is for Counterstrike - so it will be interesting to see how and what they would do in SC2. Banning Firefly for a year might not do anything if there are none...or if the next tournament is the EWC 2026
|
United States33586 Posts
On June 17 2025 05:28 Balnazza wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2025 01:27 Waxangel wrote:
I'm not particularly familiar with ESIC outside of ESL leaning on them for anti-corruption in Counter-Strike.
What's the chance they complete a thorough, full investigation and give us a conclusion we can trust? I think the ESIC is relatively thorough. They will take some time to investigate, but they usually in the end present some findings and put out bans - though I'm not sure if there are any real "legal actions" involved beyond that. However, that is for Counterstrike - so it will be interesting to see how and what they would do in SC2. Banning Firefly for a year might not do anything if there are none...or if the next tournament is the EWC 2026
I don't think ESIC needs "official" authority over StarCraft II, if such a thing can even exist right now. Fans and organizers just want SOME kind of credible entity to investigate and rule on the Firefly case, since it's hard for individual fans or small SC2 orgs to conduct a thorough investigation. Firefly even played WardiTV Mondays as of last week, because I assume Wardi didn't feel like he could make a definitive ruling on a player (I mean, the average Westerner can't even make an SCBOY account to ACCESS the forum posts, let alone read them). I think if SCBOY decided to make an official ruling on FireFly, the rest of the scene would just automatically default to their judgment.
On a somewhat related note, I should point out that the threshold for 'officially' marking someone with match-fixing in SC2 has historically been pretty high—Korean criminal cases have basically been the only things that have been acted upon at the career death-sentence level (Blizzard has ruled on the lesser crime of ladder abuse/win-trading). There was actually strong circumstantial evidence implicating Zest in terms of betting line shifts, but the SC2 community has generally not accepted such evidence as sufficient.
|
On June 17 2025 01:57 Agh wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2025 01:27 Waxangel wrote:
I'm not particularly familiar with ESIC outside of ESL leaning on them for anti-corruption in Counter-Strike.
What's the chance they complete a thorough, full investigation and give us a conclusion we can trust? Probably 0% Not worth anyone's time. Also for relative paltry sums of money it sadly isn't even worth pursuing. (Multi country, legal fees, etc.) I would say best case scenario is they can track down whoever is heading it but even then there isn't a win. If he's Chinese nothing will happen given that the pursuing bodies are in the UK and Aussieland. Since there is nothing to recoup the only thing you'd be gaining is "hopefully" preventing him from repeating, which is unlikely plus probably not going to draw any extra awareness than is already out there now.
I know ESIC for sure reached out to certain individual / players for investigation purpose. I was looped in for Translation stuff if needed.
|
On June 17 2025 06:30 Waxangel wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2025 05:28 Balnazza wrote:On June 17 2025 01:27 Waxangel wrote:
I'm not particularly familiar with ESIC outside of ESL leaning on them for anti-corruption in Counter-Strike.
What's the chance they complete a thorough, full investigation and give us a conclusion we can trust? I think the ESIC is relatively thorough. They will take some time to investigate, but they usually in the end present some findings and put out bans - though I'm not sure if there are any real "legal actions" involved beyond that. However, that is for Counterstrike - so it will be interesting to see how and what they would do in SC2. Banning Firefly for a year might not do anything if there are none...or if the next tournament is the EWC 2026 I don't think ESIC needs "official" authority over StarCraft II, if such a thing can even exist right now. Fans and organizers just want SOME kind of credible entity to investigate and rule on the Firefly case, since it's hard for individual fans or small SC2 orgs to conduct a thorough investigation. Firefly even played WardiTV Mondays as of last week, because I assume Wardi didn't feel like he could make a definitive ruling on a player (I mean, the average Westerner can't even make an SCBOY account to ACCESS the forum posts, let alone read them). I think if SCBOY decided to make an official ruling on FireFly, the rest of the scene would just automatically default to their judgment. On a somewhat related note, I should point out that the threshold for 'officially' marking someone with match-fixing in SC2 has historically been pretty high—Korean criminal cases have basically been the only things that have been acted upon at the career death-sentence level (Blizzard has ruled on the lesser crime of ladder abuse/win-trading). There was actually strong circumstantial evidence implicating Zest in terms of betting line shifts, but the SC2 community has generally not accepted such evidence as sufficient.
Yeah it's sad that Chinese internet is closed up from foreigners by regulation a years back. or long while back I don't recall when........ was really fun trolling the Chinese SC SC2 forums back then :S
|
On June 17 2025 12:40 PurE)Rabbit-SF wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2025 06:30 Waxangel wrote:On June 17 2025 05:28 Balnazza wrote:On June 17 2025 01:27 Waxangel wrote:
I'm not particularly familiar with ESIC outside of ESL leaning on them for anti-corruption in Counter-Strike.
What's the chance they complete a thorough, full investigation and give us a conclusion we can trust? I think the ESIC is relatively thorough. They will take some time to investigate, but they usually in the end present some findings and put out bans - though I'm not sure if there are any real "legal actions" involved beyond that. However, that is for Counterstrike - so it will be interesting to see how and what they would do in SC2. Banning Firefly for a year might not do anything if there are none...or if the next tournament is the EWC 2026 I don't think ESIC needs "official" authority over StarCraft II, if such a thing can even exist right now. Fans and organizers just want SOME kind of credible entity to investigate and rule on the Firefly case, since it's hard for individual fans or small SC2 orgs to conduct a thorough investigation. Firefly even played WardiTV Mondays as of last week, because I assume Wardi didn't feel like he could make a definitive ruling on a player (I mean, the average Westerner can't even make an SCBOY account to ACCESS the forum posts, let alone read them). I think if SCBOY decided to make an official ruling on FireFly, the rest of the scene would just automatically default to their judgment. On a somewhat related note, I should point out that the threshold for 'officially' marking someone with match-fixing in SC2 has historically been pretty high—Korean criminal cases have basically been the only things that have been acted upon at the career death-sentence level (Blizzard has ruled on the lesser crime of ladder abuse/win-trading). There was actually strong circumstantial evidence implicating Zest in terms of betting line shifts, but the SC2 community has generally not accepted such evidence as sufficient. Yeah it's sad that Chinese internet is closed up from foreigners by regulation a years back. or long while back I don't recall when........ was really fun trolling the Chinese SC SC2 forums back then :S
Can't we still access via VPN? Full support hahaha
But happy that they did this, match fixing kills (e-)sports.
Imagine you are Lancer, thinking to chill for the rest of the year, and found out. Now you gotta practice your @$$ off haha.
|
On June 17 2025 14:40 johnnyh123 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2025 12:40 PurE)Rabbit-SF wrote:On June 17 2025 06:30 Waxangel wrote:On June 17 2025 05:28 Balnazza wrote:On June 17 2025 01:27 Waxangel wrote:
I'm not particularly familiar with ESIC outside of ESL leaning on them for anti-corruption in Counter-Strike.
What's the chance they complete a thorough, full investigation and give us a conclusion we can trust? I think the ESIC is relatively thorough. They will take some time to investigate, but they usually in the end present some findings and put out bans - though I'm not sure if there are any real "legal actions" involved beyond that. However, that is for Counterstrike - so it will be interesting to see how and what they would do in SC2. Banning Firefly for a year might not do anything if there are none...or if the next tournament is the EWC 2026 I don't think ESIC needs "official" authority over StarCraft II, if such a thing can even exist right now. Fans and organizers just want SOME kind of credible entity to investigate and rule on the Firefly case, since it's hard for individual fans or small SC2 orgs to conduct a thorough investigation. Firefly even played WardiTV Mondays as of last week, because I assume Wardi didn't feel like he could make a definitive ruling on a player (I mean, the average Westerner can't even make an SCBOY account to ACCESS the forum posts, let alone read them). I think if SCBOY decided to make an official ruling on FireFly, the rest of the scene would just automatically default to their judgment. On a somewhat related note, I should point out that the threshold for 'officially' marking someone with match-fixing in SC2 has historically been pretty high—Korean criminal cases have basically been the only things that have been acted upon at the career death-sentence level (Blizzard has ruled on the lesser crime of ladder abuse/win-trading). There was actually strong circumstantial evidence implicating Zest in terms of betting line shifts, but the SC2 community has generally not accepted such evidence as sufficient. Yeah it's sad that Chinese internet is closed up from foreigners by regulation a years back. or long while back I don't recall when........ was really fun trolling the Chinese SC SC2 forums back then :S Can't we still access via VPN? Full support hahaha But happy that they did this, match fixing kills (e-)sports. Imagine you are Lancer, thinking to chill for the rest of the year, and found out. Now you gotta practice your @$$ off haha.
Nah, is not the VPN thing, they require a local Chinese phone number to register. And some services even goes beyond to need a local Chinese ID. It ain't like that way before ;( They just cut off the foreigners big time in recent years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
