Our Minecraft servers are offline but we will keep this forum online for any community communication. Site permissions for posting could change at a later date but will remain online.
That's looking at it the wrong way. It's people getting controversially banned, not controversially staying unbanned for ages. It's like people like Binct (whom I know nothing about aside from the fact that there was some unfortunate evidence which made it look like he was using forcefield). It would be insanely difficult to a) prove that people were teaming and b) prove that they weren't, it's all so wishy-washy.
But what if 2 players were low and avoided confrontation, and what if teamed players faked fights and got a distinct advantage over everyone else? How do you tell? I would be pissed if I got unfairly banned for teaming. People already whine enough about hacks, we don't need teaming as a complaint more than it already is.
If players avoid each other, then its clearly not teaming, is it? You'd only be punished for teaming if you were blatantly choosing not to attack someone you ought to be- i.e. someone right next to you.
Ro0d
I'm not looking at it the wrong way at all. My Austin_HG example was me arguing that in some cases hacks are a lot harder to prove/disprove than whether two players are teaming or not. And do you mind not making unsupported claims like 'it would be insanely difficult...'?
On your first point, where is the difference between that and teaming? If someone were banned for teaming then they could just immediately use that point. Or if I were teamed I could pincer movement a player with my teammate before both suddenly running off, thus avoiding each other, pretending not to be teamed, but really teaming. I could also just happen to not burn the full iron I just got, and someone could miraculously find it 30 seconds later. The possibilities are endless, there would have to be an entire rulebook on what constitutes teaming and what doesn't. Added to that, there's the manpower taken to decipher whether someone is teaming or not. Mods have enough of a problem trying to ban hackers, let alone petty disputes about "look, this guy hit me twice more than he hit that guy! they were teaming!!1" It's just not enforceable.
Oh yeah, cos Austin was sooo hard to prove, wasn't it
it was pretty clear to about 90% of EU that he was hacking, he was just friends with a ton of mods and had a few people behind him berating anyone that called him a hacker and saying he was bad. And on the unsupported claim thing, there were some situations above, such as the pincer movement one, where it would be insanely difficult to tell whether someone was teaming. Hacks are much easier to prove than teaming, not least because hackers tend to do unexplainable stuff such as Austins headsnaps, whereas there are a ton of situations in which teamers could explain that "I didn't see him" or "I was just aiming for the other guy cos I thought he was a threat" etc. etc. etc.
Now you're making some actual points. Players attacking simultaneously from different sides is definitely a grey area, as is surreptitiously sharing items. You say that there would have to be a whole rulebook on these kind of things, but I don't think there needs to be, as it's genuine teaming that's the problem and makes games 'unwinnable'. Playing tactically, such as prioritising the more threatening player in deathmatch would obviously not count as teaming. Only when players are clearly aware of each other, are within range of attack (melee) and are not doing so would it be classified as teaming. As for sharing loot, this would be undeniably extremely difficult to prove, but that's not a reason not to have the rule in place- we disallow stuff like entity radar, damage indicators and chest finder for obvious reason, but it's almost impossible to know for sure if somebody is using them unless they record themselves.On your first point, where is the difference between that and teaming? If someone were banned for teaming then they could just immediately use that point. Or if I were teamed I could pincer movement a player with my teammate before both suddenly running off, thus avoiding each other, pretending not to be teamed, but really teaming. I could also just happen to not burn the full iron I just got, and someone could miraculously find it 30 seconds later. The possibilities are endless, there would have to be an entire rulebook on what constitutes teaming and what doesn't. Added to that, there's the manpower taken to decipher whether someone is teaming or not. Mods have enough of a problem trying to ban hackers, let alone petty disputes about "look, this guy hit me twice more than he hit that guy! they were teaming!!1" It's just not enforceable.
Oh yeah, cos Austin was sooo hard to prove, wasn't it
Basically, teaming is very hard to prove, very hard also to disprove, and very difficult to enforce, as well as there being very few solutions, all of which are quite obviously limited. As such it would waste staff's time, cause unfair bans, and most likely cause A LOT of flame and hate.
I completely agree with the reasons you gave as to why teams are so problematic. You said that the game should be treated more like chess to counteract teams, but I honestly do this and I still manage to go on horrible loss streaks to nothing but teams. I am a very tactical player- I win a lot of my games without a great setup and without being particularly good at PvP- but teams are still the single biggest pain in the ass to deal with. This isn't me disagreeing with you, but a testament to how problematic they are.
You could still get that feeling if you really want to by playing on teaming servers and splitting up from your teammate(s)I agree, there are too many teams atm, but admit it, it also gives a nice feeling if you kill a team of 2/3 which contains pretty good players. Then you're just a bit proud of yourself
But yeah, I've also been seeing a lot more teams recently
You are so right!!!
