Jump to content


Clanwars Season 5 rule violation reporting


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
72 replies to this topic

Hilly #41 Posted 10 April 2017 - 06:13 AM

    We always have room for someone with the right requirements

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 11323 battles
  • 2,048
  • [PYRO] PYRO
  • Member since:
    11-19-2012

View PostD0DucHuy, on 10 April 2017 - 07:18 AM, said:

 

Okay VAF player here. I speak on behalf of the clan (Mobius can confirmed on this due to prior engagements)

QT and VAF after the prior sanction against us have move separate ways. Our clan leader was at fault for not withdrawing the battle chip in time. And if there was any rigging, why did 1AR and QT draw so we did not get to loot Pyro gold?

 

Of course we believe you, you are the commander, oh Executive Officer, oh Combat Officer ... just a recruit? So you must speak for the whole of the clan!

 

Obviously 1AR didn't play ball and QT or you couldn't get the win against them.

 

Off-topic posting. User warned

 

>Centurion_IRL

 

 


Edited by Centurion_IRL, 10 April 2017 - 12:14 PM.

 

 

 

 



Pyromaniacs [PYRO] is recruiting now. Please email/pm me if you are interested.


SWAMPWATER #42 Posted 10 April 2017 - 06:18 AM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 15111 battles
  • 87
  • [C-MAN] C-MAN
  • Member since:
    01-14-2014

View PostD0DucHuy, on 10 April 2017 - 05:18 AM, said:

 

Okay VAF player here. I speak on behalf of the clan (Mobius can confirmed on this due to prior engagements)

QT and VAF after the prior sanction against us have move separate ways. Our clan leader was at fault for not withdrawing the battle chip in time. And if there was any rigging, why did 1AR and QT draw so we did not get to loot Pyro gold?

 

Love the name dropping! Can you confirm Mobius?

 

Off-topic posting. Warning issued.

 

>Centurion_IRL


Edited by Centurion_IRL, 10 April 2017 - 12:16 PM.


Mobius99 #43 Posted 10 April 2017 - 01:37 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Administrator
  • 10008 battles
  • 279
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    03-09-2013

Hi guys,

 

Yes he was one of the main contact person since there were only a few people in VAF can use English in an understandable manner.

 

So please don't make it personal here.

 

And a final warning - anyone post off-topic in this thread in the future will be sanctioned without further warning.

 

Clans being accused for rule violation are ALLOWED to reply to defend themselves, in ONE post only.

 

This case will be investigated, any related discussion, please PM me or move to C/RD section.

 

Regards,
Mobius99 

 

  



Mobius99 #44 Posted 10 April 2017 - 07:21 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Administrator
  • 10008 battles
  • 279
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    03-09-2013

View PostHilly, on 09 April 2017 - 06:47 PM, said:

Like to report blatant offset or rigging. QT applied for a LZ against VAF (Land Owner) with 1AR.  They played 1AR a beat them.  See below.

 

Then QT have to play VAF 15 mins later.  Oh but VAF have another battle, so need two teams now. They won't be able turn up to the other battle, so just get QT to not turn up either.

 

In my opinion, VAF and QT are same players and then have in reality 3 battles, so just tech defeated the Mont Dr Marsan Battle. Please investigate.

 

 

After reviewed explaination from VAF and QT, combined with server info:

 

1. QT did chip spamming in order to queue in multiple battles, but they do not have enough resource to field enough teams to battle at the same time.

2. As above, QT deliberated abandoned unfavored battles to maximize their chance for a win to complete certain clan tasks.

3. Due to their multiple technical defeats, auto system placed penalty on the clan by reducing their VP.

4. It's the tactical choice of QT clan and they accept the fact they will be penalized by auto system, however the action is obviously unfair to other clans which affected by the technical defeat/victory.

5. VAF is not involved in this case (or at least not directly).

 

As a conclusion:

 

1. No sanction on VAF.

2. Certain amount of gold has been removed from QT's clan treasury as additional penalty for their wrong doings.

3. QT commander has been officially warned for the action since auto penalty already kicked in.

4. No further sanction will be placed on QT's clan member in this case.

5. Similar action in the future will be escalated to maximum possible penalty (other than perma ban).

 

A side note: this is the first time we have direct and active communication from VN clans who involved in rule violation case - before I hammered them - since I started managing Clanwars, although this case is still in violation of Clanwars rules, but I hope this is the first step to direct VN clans to do the right things via communication instead of hammering and banning.

 

Regards,

Mobius99



NZTankGirl #45 Posted 12 April 2017 - 06:40 PM

    Private

  • Member
  • 824 battles
  • 1
  • [BAMF] BAMF
  • Member since:
    08-24-2014

Just had a battle in clanwars tier 8 where the enemy tanks killed themselves in battle? I know that our commander was penalised for killing himself in clanwars & got a Ban for such offence. Please look into this battle and meter out punishment where it is due.

 

Offending clan was AKA.

 

[Edited]

 

The offending tankers

 

I've put up replay from our commander.

 

http://wotreplays.co...aine_155_mle_51

 

~Please do not name the players' ID

Attached Files

  • Attached File   WoT -AKA Clanwars issue 1.jpg   189.68K

Edited by Mobius99, 13 April 2017 - 01:49 PM.


stewiejp #46 Posted 13 April 2017 - 05:25 AM

    Captain

  • Community Contributor
  • 36819 battles
  • 1,358
  • [-1AR-] -1AR-
  • Member since:
    06-30-2013
@NZTG - you will need to upload the replay mate
                                                                                                                         stewiejp on youtube #getonboard

Mobius99 #47 Posted 13 April 2017 - 01:57 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Administrator
  • 10008 battles
  • 279
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    03-09-2013

View PostNZTankGirl, on 12 April 2017 - 06:40 PM, said:

Just had a battle in clanwars tier 8 where the enemy tanks killed themselves in battle? I know that our commander was penalised for killing himself in clanwars & got a Ban for such offence. Please look into this battle and meter out punishment where it is due.

 

Offending clan was AKA.

 

The two players did not selfkill but left the battle prior to battle ended, therefore their vehicles were destroyed by auto-system at the end of battle as a penalty,

 

No further action will be taken in this case.

 

Regards,

Mobius99



Ballisticx #48 Posted 13 April 2017 - 08:59 PM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 42989 battles
  • 70
  • [BAMF] BAMF
  • Member since:
    12-29-2013

Double standards again from Wargaming I see.

 

Off Topic Posting, User Sanctioned.

/Bounty


Edited by Bounty, 13 April 2017 - 09:20 PM.


Graphicnd #49 Posted 15 April 2017 - 05:44 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta-Tester
  • 29875 battles
  • 84
  • [PYRO] PYRO
  • Member since:
    10-02-2012
Please check 2pm tech loss on Carurs Fjords last night. I couldn't see them with other battles. Seems 5AE ooops sorry 2pm are at it again. 

AoW_XmegaAVR #50 Posted 15 April 2017 - 05:11 PM

    Private

  • Member
  • 47743 battles
  • 2
  • [-ROE-] -ROE-
  • Member since:
    11-21-2013

View PostGraphicnd, on 14 April 2017 - 09:44 PM, said:

Please check 2pm tech loss on Carurs Fjords last night. I couldn't see them with other battles. Seems 5AE ooops sorry 2pm are at it again. 

 

Because at that time we dont have enough member to join the battle OK bro

Edited by AoW_XmegaAVR, 15 April 2017 - 05:11 PM.


Mobius99 #51 Posted 17 April 2017 - 12:39 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Administrator
  • 10008 battles
  • 279
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    03-09-2013

View PostGraphicnd, on 15 April 2017 - 05:44 AM, said:

Please check 2pm tech loss on Carurs Fjords last night. I couldn't see them with other battles. Seems 5AE ooops sorry 2pm are at it again. 

 

Auto-system already kicked in and placed penalty on the clan, so we will leave it as it is for now.

 

Regards,

Mobius99



Pandora_Fly #52 Posted 22 April 2017 - 01:09 AM

    Private

  • Member
  • 8549 battles
  • 4
  • [BBQ] BBQ
  • Member since:
    12-19-2013

Hi.
 

Why my clan occupy the enemy base is 100 points but still draw? While the enemy has 11s completely occupy our clan base.
Clan battle: BBQ vs VAE.
Map : Himmelsdorf - Standard. Time 21h30 UTC + 7 date 21/04/2017.
Screenshot: 
Replays : http://wotreplays.co...andora_fly-is-7

Attached Files

  • Attached File   17973735_637398123117202_4756838512507117373_o.jpg   135.6K

Edited by Pandora_Fly, 22 April 2017 - 01:10 AM.


stewiejp #53 Posted 22 April 2017 - 05:52 AM

    Captain

  • Community Contributor
  • 36819 battles
  • 1,358
  • [-1AR-] -1AR-
  • Member since:
    06-30-2013
Pandora, when the cap reaches 100% (even when 11 seconds in the lead on the cap race) every time somebody gets killed on either side the game is extended by just a few seconds. That's what happened in your game, and allowed VAE to "catch up" on the cap counter and draw the match. 
                                                                                                                         stewiejp on youtube #getonboard

Mobius99 #54 Posted 25 April 2017 - 04:14 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Administrator
  • 10008 battles
  • 279
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    03-09-2013

Hi Pandora,

 

Like what stewiejp said, after reach 100% capture, there will be a 5 seconds buffer time, and battle will further extend for 5 seconds whenever a tank is destroyed during the session, therefore allowing VAE to catch up and reach 100% capture before battle ended, resulted in a draw.

 



thommo_nz #55 Posted 29 April 2017 - 05:39 PM

    Sergeant

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 44409 battles
  • 189
  • [NZAD] NZAD
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

Possible alt/unmanned account in Clan Wars

 

http://wotreplays.co...t_252u_defender

 

One tank only moved when first hit - could be account managed by script.

Many tanks did not move far - very unusual for Lightweights for scouting.

Thanks

 



Khuong_pro #56 Posted 01 May 2017 - 08:58 PM

    Private

  • Member
  • 35273 battles
  • 7
  • [P-F] P-F
  • Member since:
    01-26-2014

Battle C-MAN vs. -QT-   Map Cliff  in 6:15 Pm

I would like to report C-MAN have massive AFK in battle!  6 member

[Edited]

http://wotreplays.co...ng_pro-kranvagn

We ask for the highest punishment for them : 7 days game ban!

 

Name and shame, consider this is a RV report thread, naturally it's possible to see the names from the evidence provided, but please do not name those player directly.

~Mobius99


Edited by Mobius99, 02 May 2017 - 05:14 PM.


Hilly #57 Posted 02 May 2017 - 08:36 AM

    We always have room for someone with the right requirements

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 11323 battles
  • 2,048
  • [PYRO] PYRO
  • Member since:
    11-19-2012

View PostKhuong_pro, on 02 May 2017 - 12:58 AM, said:

Battle C-MAN vs. -QT-   Map Cliff  in 6:15 Pm

I would like to report C-MAN have massive AFK in battle!  6 member

[Removed]

http://wotreplays.co...ng_pro-kranvagn

We ask for the highest punishment for them : 7 days game ban!

 

Thanks for your report Knuong_pro. You are correct, they had 6 players who didn't load into the game from what I hear. "failing to connect to server"  The 6 players couldn't even log back in either.  Happy for Mobius to look into this as I know CMAN had 15 kids all wanting to give CWs a go last night but were left disappointed.

Edited by Flying_Elite, 04 May 2017 - 11:34 PM.
Quote updated

 

 

 

 



Pyromaniacs [PYRO] is recruiting now. Please email/pm me if you are interested.


stewiejp #58 Posted 02 May 2017 - 10:04 AM

    Captain

  • Community Contributor
  • 36819 battles
  • 1,358
  • [-1AR-] -1AR-
  • Member since:
    06-30-2013
A lot of players had connection issues last night, "fail to connect to server" was the error-  skype was going off about it and I noticed I couldn't access the WoT websites for a period as well. 
                                                                                                                         stewiejp on youtube #getonboard

Mobius99 #59 Posted 02 May 2017 - 05:11 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Administrator
  • 10008 battles
  • 279
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    03-09-2013

View PostKhuong_pro, on 01 May 2017 - 08:58 PM, said:

Battle C-MAN vs. -QT-   Map Cliff  in 6:15 Pm

I would like to report C-MAN have massive AFK in battle!  6 member

[Edited]

http://wotreplays.co...ng_pro-kranvagn

We ask for the highest punishment for them : 7 days game ban!

 

Multiple reports of connection issue in AUS/NZ on May 1st, therefore this case is considered an "Force Majeure" event at the moment, we will further check the issue.

 

And one more thing, please DO NOT "ask for" punishment to specific player(s), nor name the players on forum.

WG staff will investigate the case and decide if any sanction needed.

 

Regards,
Mobius99



Mobius99 #60 Posted 02 May 2017 - 05:26 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Administrator
  • 10008 battles
  • 279
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    03-09-2013

View Postthommo_nz, on 29 April 2017 - 05:39 PM, said:

Possible alt/unmanned account in Clan Wars

 

http://wotreplays.co...t_252u_defender

 

One tank only moved when first hit - could be account managed by script.

Many tanks did not move far - very unusual for Lightweights for scouting.

Thanks

 

 

Combined with another report from a different clan, we found the RE3EL had unusual AFK behavior in a few battles on Apr 29th, we found the case maybe related with unstable connection.

 

However, during the investigation, we also found multiple accounts were used by the same person/PC at the same time, therefore following sanction will be placed on clan officers and players involved.

 

Clan officers - 3 days game ban for warning..

Players involved in account sharing/multi-login - 7 days game ban.
Clan officers who AFK/account sharing/multi-login in this incident will receive 14 days game ban.

 

Similar incident in the future will see the sanction escalated.

Mobius99


Edited by Mobius99, 02 May 2017 - 05:35 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users