Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Post edit history

B1169691 2 on Intersection v4.1 (Multiplayer)

To display differences between versions, select one or more edits in the list using checkboxes and click "diff selected"
Post edit history
Date Editor Before After
8/6/2021 12:37:51 PMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
8/6/2021 12:35:19 PMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
8/6/2021 12:34:51 PMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
8/6/2021 12:34:33 PMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
8/6/2021 12:34:16 PMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
8/6/2021 12:33:39 PMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
8/6/2021 12:33:31 PMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
8/6/2021 12:29:51 PMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
8/6/2021 12:29:18 PMAUrankAdminAquanim before revert after revert
Before After
1 [quote]Really speaks a lot about people using such unfair advantages in ranked games and being upset like USrankShaman when it's exposed.[/quote] 1 [quote]Really speaks a lot about people using such unfair advantages in ranked games and being upset like USrankShaman when it's exposed.[/quote]
2 I believe Shaman's comment was more along the lines of "ruining the making of widgets in general" rather than "ruining the secret that this particular widget exists". 2 I believe Shaman's comment was more along the lines of "ruining the making of widgets in general" rather than "ruining the secret that this particular widget exists".
3 \n 3 \n
4 [quote]Reminds me when that one guy had an actual AI play the game for him. Or all those other completely legal unit catapult aimbots.[/quote] 4 [quote]Reminds me when that one guy had an actual AI play the game for him. Or all those other completely legal unit catapult aimbots.[/quote]
5 @Archangel had an AI play the game for him. The admins came to the conclusion that this was untenable and required Archangel to stop. Archangel did not stop, which was a contributing factor to Archangel's subsequent permanent ban from the community. When something is determined to in fact be unacceptable abuse of widgets/AI control/similar we do take that seriously. 5 @Archangel had an AI play the game for him. The admins came to the conclusion that this was untenable and required Archangel to stop. Archangel did not stop, which was a contributing factor to Archangel's subsequent permanent ban from the community. When something is determined to in fact be unacceptable abuse of widgets/AI control/similar we do take that seriously.
6 \n 6 \n
7 I am not aware of a compelling reason to designate any unit catapult widget I know about as *not* legal. 7 I am not aware of a compelling reason to designate any unit catapult widget I know about as *not* legal. They don't seem to result in degenerate gameplay.
8 \n 8 \n
9 [quote]Here's a radical suggestion, actually punish such intentional cheaters. 9 [quote]Here's a radical suggestion, actually punish such intentional cheaters.
10 [/quote] 10 [/quote]
11 I don't see a reasonable case for this being bannable. The admins could conceivably decide that *future* use of such a widget is bannable but that is a very different thing to it being bannable retroactively. I think even that is pretty unlikely in this case, since the line between valid and invalid unit micro from a widget is difficult to define, @GoogleFrog is generally against bans for things of this kind, and I believe there are ways to make this widget infeasible in a technical sense instead (although they may be distasteful). 11 I don't see a reasonable case for this being bannable. The admins could conceivably decide that *future* use of such a widget is bannable but that is a very different thing to it being bannable retroactively. I think even that is pretty unlikely in this case, since the line between valid and invalid unit micro from a widget is difficult to define, @GoogleFrog is generally against bans for things of this kind, and I believe there are ways to make this widget infeasible in a technical sense instead (although they may be distasteful).
12 \n 12 \n
13 That having been said, if @RiposteR requests it I am willing to tag this game as no-elo. 13 That having been said, if @RiposteR requests it I am willing to tag this game as no-elo.