Has he done seasonal ladder yet to complete the selection?

One sense of me says this is unfair on Octane, That he isn't the only person to switch accounts on 1v1 and RT Ladder. Why should he be picked out of all the "bad apples" to be made a example of on this thread?

But I remind myself about his achievement of the ability to do so many ladder runs.. 3 runs on the 1v1 ladder through 3 of his alts, 2 runs on the 2v2 ladder using his alts for both teams and now 2 runs on the 3v3 ladder including his alts , Where he likely lost a game and is again starting a new run.. Doing these runs in such a short time has made him stick out to the community and in doing so in terms of the amount of runs and ladder quits after someone beats him.. Has effectively annoyed a lot of people internally effected in the ladders and externally watching him.

So I have to wonder to myself, If Octane really misunderstand the rules according to his lawyer Cowboy. Why isn't he here to say "Hey, I fucked up I misunderstood this this and this, I promise to not do it again..." I'm not saying it would fix things but it would leave less people salty.. Though he probably doesn't care as he did leaving those ladders immediately after he lost a game to start his new adventure on his next alt.

Though the rules aren't introduced yet, What Octane has done up this point has and will piss off people. People are aware and people are annoyed so.. Expect there to be "shitposting" especially when a thread like this comes up to use Octane as a example.

Whenever people are asking about fake news, I am just going to show them this thread.

Though the rules aren't introduced yet

Come on. If there are no rules, then what are you complaining about? *roll eyes*

Just cus there are Potential new rules, don't mean the old rules never where there. Old being current rules.

The real question is not really if Octane is a bad person or not. The question is why he did it.
We want to improve the ladders, and if players find it beneficial to just switch accounts then something is wrong with the ladder. Particularly given the number of cases of alting on the ladder.

If Octane wanted more games at a time, then maybe a cap of 5 is to low? (I know this is what some alters say.)
If Octane thinks that 5 months is to long, then maybe it is too long. (It sure is a long time to wait.)

For example switching to Glicko to get rid of expiring games and raising the cap to 10 games (after you have a rating Glicko deems trustworthy) could help.

Edited 9/27/2017 00:26:52

I think you are reading into that comment in the way I didn't want you to. I said that sentence in the context that someone can claim Octane is doing nothing wrong cause there are no rules introduced yet. I could've worded that better but whatever I suck at English.. Suppose to get my test results on this topic tomorrow..

@TBest:

I said (somewhat) because it has been common practice-which didn't result in ban and yes, I saw your response and even Beren himself mentioned on a post that these rules exist already. Also like you mentioned, it is difficult to find which account is alt especially as not all players says this is my other account(s) openly like Octane or myself or anyone who does so.

Ofc., I agree that this is violation of rules-but general perspective (or as how many sees it) is that as long as I don't play myself it isn't a violation.

@Platinum:

hmmm, I think Octane stands out since he kept all accounts in same name and doesn't hide alts. maybe he should have named something irrelevant and kept it secret that it is his other accounts.

In general, I can show a player from a respectable clan ( or at least that's what I think of it), who actually played against himself on RTL game recently (apparently unknowingly as per him/her) and surrendered on picks(stating the previous (claim)). I am sure few more people knows it(one way or the other) and there happens to be a clan member who has even posted regarding Octane here went to silent mode on what his clan member did.

I am not mentioning this player as a bad player who did such a thing on purpose or not supporting the claim that unknowingly getting self on RTL. I honestly can't find such a game where Octane plays self and surrenders, so if he did that too-enlighten me. The real question is not if Octane is bad or not, and not why he did it, just why Octane alone, as, at-least, I don't remember selecting him for representative for cult of alt-runs and he never volunteered for the same.

Ofc., ladder rating manipulation with sugar-talking and offering deals in PM aren't against the rules and is strictly off-topic ;)

Edited 9/27/2017 00:43:18

Kid don't be so evasive, be fun and put some names for those who are not aware of all WL gossips please! :-) TY


.. Putting pop corn in micro wave

On the subject : I have to agree with Tbest and those rules vs guys who defend Octane. Ladder shouldn't be about congratulating top run performers on a template on a trial error method and then change their main account to the highest ranked one, but top players on that template. If everybody was doing that it would be a mess. I have a dream that Ladders are reserved to mains only some day =).

Edited 9/27/2017 01:09:34

@mike - he means:
https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=14176717

neal + Clint-West-Wood

both are from Netherlands.

@Kid:

• aren't there hundert players from Netherlands?
  
• everyone can be booted. especially in real-time games. reasons can be:
  

  
  

  you have to eat something
  

  phone call
  

  closet
  

  you were thinking too long vs an unbeaten player
  

  child has fallen and someone has to comfort it
  

  the picks you got are frustrating yourself
  

  someone has ring the doorbell f.e. pizza delivery
  

  losing internet connection/ pc crashed
  

  ...
  

Edited 9/27/2017 02:27:49

Surrendered on picks and apparently it maybe a mistake. So, let's just see this as a player keeping an alt as secret and playing self and not pointing to a particular player(which isn't intentional).

Edited 9/27/2017 04:14:21

He doesn't mean them.

Neal is not Clint. Neal is much better than Clint.

For platinum - "and now 2 runs on the 3v3 ladder including his alts , Where he likely lost a game and is again starting a new run", That's just blatantly wrong. We were waiting for Cowboy to reduce his game count so we could start the 3v3 run we've been planning since the end of mine, Cowboys, and SuperSmooves run. Please don't sully my name thinking I'm involved in any of Octanes actions when they are his alone to do and defend.

The follow has nothing to do with the defense of Octane or his actions, and is more an overall viewpoint on the points brought up in this thread

What is the difference between 1 player running 3 accounts on the same 3v3 team; and 1 player who is vastly superior to the other 2 players just telling them exactly what to do?

Why does it matter if someone quits the ladder, and rejoins with an alt account that doesn't play against the other accounts in the first place? There's no rigging involved, there's no cheating, they just want to see if they can get to a new peak rank without waiting the ridiculous 5 months it takes for older games to expire(which by the way, is way too fkn long). It sounds more like you have an issue with the system, and instead of addressing your concerns towards that, you choose players as scapegoats because they are using the system in a way you personally do not feel is right. Hate the game, not the players.

As of right now, getting #1 on the ladder doesn't even mean you're the best at the 1v1 ladder. It just means you're the best of the people who happen to be on the ladder at that given point in time. In fact, it doesn't even mean that. It just means you were the best at getting ladder points of the players on the ladder at that given time, and even then there may be multiple players who are better at that, and just haven't played enough games yet. With this being a major issues for a fairly long period of time, I can't see how going after individual players helps solve the main problem at all. That problem being - The #1 player on a ladder at any given point in time may not actually be the best player on that ladder.

Since this thread seems like just a lot of complaining and witch hunting; I'll start off some actual discussion.

Short term solution - Enforce a minimum amount of games played in order to have your rank actually be counted on your profile, or to get trophies. How many? I don't know I'm just a scrub.

Short term solution #2 - Reduce the amount of time it takes for games on the ladder to expire.

Long term solution - Fix the actual system itself, the ELO system is wack; punishing long term players while giving massive boosts to short term players and "ladder runners".

~~~ The afforementioned post solely reflects my own views and opinions, and has no bearing on those of the 101st.

@Demoz

The general rule is that as long as you don'g get an unfair advantage then you are good to go. Controlling multiple accounts on one team has been deemed okey. If you where thinking of the screenshot on the other page, the point was that a player appeared to be in two 3v3 teams at the same time, not that he had a team made of himself.

Why does it matter if someone quits the ladder, and rejoins with an alt account that doesn't play against the other accounts in the first place? There's no rigging involved, there's no cheating, they just want to see if they can get to a new peak rank without waiting the ridiculous 5 months it takes for older games to expire(which by the way, is way too fkn long)

Good question, I bet a lot of thoose who multiacount on the ladder followed this logic. "What is the harm?"

So by doing this you gain an unfair advantage. You say #### you to the rating and matching system. You can just "ignore" your past losses. A new shot at a good rank, means you got *two* tries where others got one. Ultimately you screw over other players. The theory behind all ranking system is that they get more accurate over time as they get more data/games on a player.

With this being a major issues for a fairly long period of time, I can't see how going after individual players helps solve the main problem at all.

It's to discourage other players from doing the same thing. If we just said "meh, we don't really care" then everyone else gets the signal that it is okey to break the rules. In short, we go after individual players to make them an example.

Ofc, we would all love a better permanent fix, but it is not as easy as it sounds. There have been many calls to change the elo-system and I think it would help. But Fizzer surely is busy enough and his roadmap is close to infinity. Given that all the past games result is recorded, I have a dream that some amazing community member will query the API, and then record the ladder results in another elo-format.

So you would point out things like this when other players do it right, or do you only care it's this one player

I already got examples if need be.

Like Kid said, Octane is the most visible due to him being transparent about which alt accounts are his. There are many examples of players having multiple runs (historically) without having all the games expire on their other ladder accounts.

https://www.warlight.net/LadderTeam?LadderTeamID=12721
https://www.warlight.net/LadderTeam?LadderTeamID=14814
https://www.warlight.net/LadderTeam?LadderTeamID=17566
https://www.warlight.net/LadderTeam?LadderTeamID=18218

(This is just the best example I could find currently, not as a method to start another stupid flamewar. Nauz hasn't started his other 29 runs yet, or I'd post those links.)

I also am culpable for "gaming" the system by starting a run on an alt while my games were expiring on my main. I was impatient and had started the alt run a couple of days before the last two games on my main expired. This chaining of ladder runs isn't new, and it won't be an issue until the rules pertaining to chaining runs are put into effect. If Octane or anyone else is breaking the ladder rules after they are put into effect, then I'll understand and agree with people calling rulebreakers out. Until then, I see no point in all this constant attacking.

@TBest, stalling also gives players an "unfair advantage" currently, yet I've seen nobody complain about this in the thread: https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=14024002

Edited 9/27/2017 04:18:52

"You shall not operate more than one WarLight account in a way that gives you an advantage in a game, tournament or ladder."

That rule is already in place and as i cleared up in a thread recently it is not allowed to play with multiple accounts on ladders, when other accounts of yourself have unexpired games. Fizzers statement on my question was clear on that.

(It also doesn't matter if someone saw my thread or not, we all agreed on those 4 rules posted in the warlight wiki before our first game.)

People weren't punished for it yet, but those rules are there and are in place, so yes u can definitely say Octane broke the rules and could receive a warning, ban or whatever for it, as could others.

Edited 9/27/2017 04:24:25

sry, double posting???

Edited 9/27/2017 04:26:39

@AG you linked a gameID, not a thred. But people certainly complain about stalling giving an unfair advantage in past seasonal ladders.

I don’t feel like Octane has been hated on that much compered to past cases. Like the one regarding my clan. But it certainly is possible my memory is biased. I will say it again for my own amusement but the rules regarding multaconting certenty was and are i place right now. Either way give it a couple of weeks or days and we will probably have some new drama taking all the focus anyway.

Read the chat TBest.

I don’t feel like Octane has been hated on that much compered to past cases. Like the one regarding my clan. But it certainly is possible my memory is biased. I will say it again for my own amusement but the rules regarding multaconting certenty was and are i place right now. Either way give it a couple of weeks or days and we will probably have some new drama taking all the focus anyway.

His name is the only name here being dragged in the mud which is unfair. Same goes for any other players who got singled out if they hadn't been given a fair warning prior.

I think the fact that it's just a game ID and not an actual thread proves my point already.

@Edge, Fizzer has always been incredibly lax on rules. In fact, Ladder Rule #3 in the New Ladder Rules is just there to make the only "unofficial" rule on the RTL (that you can only have one ranked account on the ladder at all times) official. But with the way the rules are enforced, it has become commonplace to ignore them and get away with things that are technically against the rules. For example, players have sworn/used derogatory insults frequently in WL games, have had multiple coin accounts, have hacked other players' accounts, etc. and 99% have not been punished. Players who have even played their alts on the ladder have not been banned or even suspended. So, you could definitely say anyone who has operated multiple accounts on the 1v1 ladder with unexpired games (including myself for a period of 2 weeks) deserves to be banned, but with how lenient rule-breakers are treated it's no wonder so many continue to break the rules - knowingly or unknowingly. You cannot fault Octane alone (as people have been doing so here) for being the latest in a horde of rule-breaking cases.

@TBest, your clan has been hated on because of a select few constantly dragging your reputation down in the forums. So, realistically, you have only your clanmates to blame for that.

Edited 9/27/2017 04:47:42

First Edge makes a post, with snapshot of mail-where Fizzer says for non-RT one has to wait till the games expire.

Then Beren makes a post(the opening post) where he says, "I have been working with Fizzer and a few other people to draft a set of potential official rules for Warlight ladders. Also, there will now be a point of emphasis to enforce these rules more strongly than has happened in the past. "

In later posts in same thread, TBest and Beren says these aren't new rules, already existing one and in his post Fizzer says "Before these rules are accepted, I suggest that we should try as hard as possible to define what is considered stalling and what isn't."
So, did Fizzer say about all the rules as these rules or the rule concerning stalling alone as these rules?

With confusing word play in this thread, whose words exactly have to be taken? I am confused and might have misunderstood that Fizzer meant all these rules are to be accepted sometime later and I were to see an announcement of these rules and it is ok to do my alt runs before that particular announcement. (sorry for being bad in English,if I misunderstood that).

@TBest- Awesome guy meant this thread as this thread and the game linked as a proof for stalling a loss, which apparently gave that 2v2 ladder team 1st rank(if i am correct).

Edited 9/27/2017 04:58:09

Kid all 3 things can be right the same time. The actual rule just says you shall not operate an alt account on a ladder which gives you unfair advantage. To clear up what is considered to be an umfair advantage beren tried to make rules. The only really new aspect of the rules are stalling imo, which was unethical before, but not defined on what is stalling.

@TBest, stalling also gives players an "unfair advantage" currently, yet I've seen nobody complain about this in the thread: https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=14024002

Yeah, dry-clean-only definitey stalled a turn here, and that allowed them to take the 1st place and the golden trophy from boubou and me. But really, I don't blame him here.

The 2v2 ladder was broken for a couple of days, on the 08/09 and on the 09/09. And right before it broke, dry-clean-only and carlos were right behind us, I remember that at some point on the 07/09, they were 2nd but they had the same rating we had.
Given how ratings fluctuate, it's very likely that they'd have taken the 1st place fair and square on the 08/09 or the 09/09, if the ladder had worked properly.

So in this particular situation - and only because the ladder was broken -, I can understand the stalling.