There does not have to be an official word regarding every single possible exploit/bug/mechanic/manipulation possible in this game. The catchall for this is the verbiage I provided in my last reply. If the act falls under a main category violation such as an intentional act that impacts game balance, then ES has the right to take action against someone intentionally throwing matches providing an unfair advantage to another.
- People currently bypass the random matching system to play duty roulette with their friends. People currently abuse the commendation system by doing the same thing to match with friends in Guildhests, and then give each other quick commendations. No one is currently being punished for participating in either exploit.
So your argument here is that three wrongs then make a right? Regardless of whether an action has been taken by ES, it has no bearing on whether an action can be taken. I still see bots I reported weeks ago, this does not in any way suggest to me that bots are legal.
Ultimately I agree that boosting for experience is lame, and wouldn't do it myself. But at the same time it feels more like "videogame morals" than actual cheating.
I disagree.
Someone could get 4 friends that aren't as good to play against them repeatedly-- and gain the same benefit. If their friends aren't intentionally throwing the match, is it boosting?
If no discussion took place about trading wins and both teams do nothing intentionally to give the other an unfair advantage other than queuing at the same time, I would not consider this action as trading win/losses.
Without an official response from SE on what they feel is intended, you can't really make a definite argument either way.
But your previous statement was that this action was ‘not’ against any rules and I disagree for the reasons provided in this and my previous post.
If I were an ES employee, I could make a very definite and effective argument for banning someone for agreeing to trade wins and losses against one another in a pvp match resulting in an unfair advantage over someone that is not willing to manipulate the system to gain the unfair advantage.
Again, ES has final say in what is and is not acceptable (with advantage on their side) and their decision on what is and is not acceptable does not have to be based on something literally spelled out in the rules. Anyone reading this knows that the system was not intended for 8 people to get together and intentionally trade wins and losses for quick rewards and that any ES employee would have a legitimate reason to ban someone for this activity under the violation of activities that impact game balance.
Again, I would report the action, provide details and names, and offer screen prints. If you do not agree, simply do not report.


Reply With Quote

