Page 9 of 35 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 350

Thread: Tournament Collusion & Bribery: HXE's Official Stand

  1. #81
    For what it's worth, splitting is not exactly relevant to the case of the Qualifier points, as you can't agree to a split with one side winning. Either player can choose to concede, but as soon as you agree who will concede or lose the match, it becomes collusion, which is against MtG rules. If Hex has a similar policy (which it doesn't, yet), then it will be impossible to 'split' QPs.
    In-game: Obsidian || Collector backer || Starting a guild for Newbies -- "The Cerulea Acadamy"
    Quote Originally Posted by Aradon View Post
    Cory is a man of unrelenting promises and optimism!

  2. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by Aradon View Post
    For what it's worth, splitting is not exactly relevant to the case of the Qualifier points, as you can't agree to a split with one side winning. Either player can choose to concede, but as soon as you agree who will concede or lose the match, it becomes collusion, which is against MtG rules. If Hex has a similar policy (which it doesn't, yet), then it will be impossible to 'split' QPs.
    Personally, I don't see anything as collusion unless you already had made an agreement before you were matched against your opponent (meaning it would be someone you knew and had previously agreed with them to split.) Even matching against guild members or friends, if the agreement comes at the time you are matched, I don't see that as collusion.

    My views may not match up with other people, but I really feel there has to be some forethought to constitute collusion, like a group of friends all joining the same tournament with the intent to get each other the best possible prize payout as a group. Making a mention to an opponent that you have run out of time/energy etc and would prefer to split than play is perfectly legal and if both sides agree to the terms, there shouldn't be any kind of punishment.
    Xenavire, proud guild leader for The Lions Share.
    http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/n...erlinsmall.png

  3. #83
    All Hex needs to do is make some broad policy that lets them step in and reference it if something gets out of hand.
    Soon™
    IGN - Mitthrawnuruodo
    One half of the "Frick and Frack of negativity".

  4. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by Kami View Post
    This isn't something that is black/white. There are arguments on both sides and I understand both sides. I just don't agree with the concept of replacing skill with resource spending in situations where you are meant to earn something via said skill.
    That is a fair statement. I propose this--and instead of taking it to a Mod Only thread I believe this warrants collective community feedback and ask this question to the entire community. If rules were set in place to combat this behavior, how would it be implemented & the rules be stated?

    Keep in mind the following:
    1. A guild / team / etc is capable of timing draft creations and completely filling a draft. Rinse / Repeat would fully allow for all participants to get the necessary points for the Qualifier Tourn.
    2. Are the rules all encompassing across all types of thresholds people would desire? Off the top of my head, I conjure up the below for thresholds people would want to achieve and would need to be on the radar:
      • Tickets Earned for Qualifers
      • Top 64 Sleeves
      • Top 8 Sleeves
      • Qualifier Tournament Win
    3. Below are some scenarios off the top of my head that could be used to reach an end. Should these be restricted? What of those that advertise services? What of those that participate--both parties disqualified for Q period or entire tournament? Can these services be advertised on our boards if not accepting $$$? From here on out, I will state "Individual" to mean teammate/guildmate/friend/employer/etc.
      • 8 man draft/constructed teams that completely fill queues to rotate wins to achieve Q Tickets
      • Games thrown (how can this be proven) to allow Individual win
      • Games Instructed via screenshare/twitch/etc by Pro to allow Individual win
      • Games Split to allow win. What of to become of Individual who makes request that is denied?

    4) Where would potential violations be sent? I would presume https://www.hextcg.com/support/ would be utilized. A lot of potential man hours could be invested to track down tips from both HexEnt and Support. Viewing hours as an opportunity cost also takes away from development.


    Feel free to also include items I may have inadvertently omitted that should also be considered.

  5. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by Gwaer View Post
    Stok3d is way off base though about screen sharing and remote desktop to allow others to play in your account without 'logging into' your account. That's not a safe Avenue to buck the rules on sharing accounts and is incredibly scummy, imo.
    It is my hypothesis that the 'No Account Sharing' clause was formulated to curb people from:
    1. Actually Selling the Account and claiming it was being shared
    2. Renting out the Kickstarter Perks
    3. Curb the Scams / Tickets / Product Research that comes with people sharing accounts


    I'm not claiming that I necessarily support screen shares, but you better believe this type of behavior is present in other games. If we are to discuss rulings, then this also needs to be on the radar and why I'm mentioning it.

    Also, an explicit ruling is in order for the specifics on 'No Account Sharing' if it is to extend beyond physically logging on to someone's account. How is this different than someone standing behind the player on a screen or being on Skype? How does Twitch fall into this mix (watch ruling wording)? Heck, what of people who are Pro's who advertise Paid Training Lessons to help others improve their game? Are they not allowed to screen share at any time? With Hex becoming an E-Sport, this is also a scenario that comes about and is common in other games.

    As Kami said, much is beyond simply Black and White...

  6. #86
    Gigantisaur
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Athens Georgia
    Posts
    1,238
    The simple solution is too allow the low level entry tickets to be tradeable.

    1. CZE wins because they get a 10% cut on the sale.

    2. If somebody wants to split in exchange for the ticket, it does not matter because you can just buy the ticket on the AH.

    3. It allows players who do not have as much time a chance to play at the higher level if they make "that" time.

    4. It gives a good income for new players as they can make even more Plat by selling the tickets. This also applies to the PvE crowd who might not give a hoot about the tournament.

    5. The scheduled tournaments might get even more players since the win potential would be even higher than it already is.

    6. CZE does not have to police anything since it would no longer really matter.

    7. As a bonus to the other topic that has been discussed, it allows those players who live in certain states to get something out of this rather than nothing. This means more players playing.

    Seems like the easiest solution.
    Last edited by Mahes; 10-07-2015 at 08:50 AM.
    The art work for opening the chest is very nice.

  7. #87
    Determined Zombie
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    74
    I think we can all agree that the important thing here is to get official clarification. If the end result of this is I am punished but we all learn and rules are established, I would classify that as a net win for the community.

    I thank you all for having some understanding and want you to know I take this situation seriously and await further info.
    KS Backer King Tier
    Hex Streamer: http://sithos.tv

  8. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by Sithos View Post
    I think we can all agree that the important thing here is to get official clarification. If the end result of this is I am punished but we all learn and rules are established, I would classify that as a net win for the community.
    Two people both go away happy with the final result while no one else is hurt by it. It would be ridiculous if you were punished.
    Soon™
    IGN - Mitthrawnuruodo
    One half of the "Frick and Frack of negativity".

  9. #89
    Does megadwarfdev screen share? I stopped watching but it seems they enter the same draft pool. I think they even commented on it in the hex preview of streamers a few weeks ago.

  10. #90
    Devoted Emissary
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mexico D.F.
    Posts
    147
    My only concern would be collusion/bribery for the top 8 of the IQ. It has happened in many games before that in the last round a player who can still make it to top 8 gets paired against a player who can't. In the wow tcg times a writer for the main site gave the win to a friend in order for him to get a top 8 spot and acknowledged it on his article. There was a long discussion like the one we are having right now with people on both sides, but the truth is that he didn't ask for anything in return so it wasn't really collusion/bribery.
    i
    Do we need a policy? Yes and I think it should be up before the first IQ. IMO splitting should be allowed only for finalists, but in a virtual game it's going to be very difficult to enforce a policy as there are sadly many ways to get around them and still negotiate wins. So like it or not this is going to happen but I think it will be impossible for someone to pay their wins all the way to the top. Will there be isolated cases that will knock someone out of a top 8? Yes, but it's still on the hands of a player to win as many games as possible and tiebrakers are usually about luck too when drawing the line for a top 8.
    Champion of the Black Flame #227

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •