No.
Because it hinders higher BR to be brought into lower BR match, not the other way around.
Reports if it’s isolated instances ( How to properly report players and contact Game Masters! ). The forum to voice an opinion on regular occurrences and larger scale issues not yet addressed. Then Community managers (and others) forward concerns where noticed and deemed appropriate to do so.
You literally do as proving the malicious intent behind someone just leaving the game after his death can’t be done.
As I also already said, not all actions need to be malicious or intentional to issue punishments. What you’ve caused with your action definitely should and can be used to dish out punishments.
Can you tell me why do you want to stop higher BR vehicles to be brought into lower BR games, is it maybe because those engagements would be unfair to players ? It’s actually funny how the story basically writes itself.
That said, if you don’t want higher BR vehicles to be brought into lower BR games, then it’s logical to stop people from bringing lower BR vehicles into higher tier games as the end result will be literally the same.
The end result: Reserve tier vehicle fighting 12.0 one.
By intentionally putting yourself on a back foot you’re doing the same to your random teammates as well, which goes against the spirit of fair play, am I right ?
Thanks.
Must have been the other CAS apologetic, my apologies.
There is no logical connection here. One is the choice of the unbeatable vehicle, the other is the choice of the underdog. It’s VERY different.
There’s a clear logical connection there if your goal is stopping unfair engagements from happening.
You choosing to be the underdog would be fine if happening in a PvE mode, but we are talking about a PvP mode where you have 15 other people to think about, so you doing the “underdog” will mess up with their experience as well and all of that is been done with intent to top it off.
I don’t know how you still can’t see that purposely trying to be the underdog in a game like this basically goes against the spirit of fair play.
This is like you’d play games in CS2 with nothing but a knife and for your excuse you’d use “Sorry bruv, I’m just trying to be an underdog” argument. I guess that it doesn’t matter you ruined their experience, griefed them and broke the spirit of fair play.
Everything is allowable if you want it, who cares about other random strangers that haven’t signed up to your shenanigans, right ?
lol k
How much experience do you have with those units?
Clearly none. I apologise I had to photograph it, my Xbox is not allowing me to screenshot at the moment. Classic Microsoft, “we cannot save at this time” bollocks.
It can. If you go to the replay, see someone spot a missile coming for them, and Js out before getting hit… pretty clear what their goal was.
Your reasonable doubt doesn’t count as a concrete proof of malicious intent behind someone leaving the game. A player might just learnt about his house being on fire or that someone is burglarizing his home so he left the game right there on the spot.
Cool, so two things that almost never happens versus ending themselves on purpose. What could it possibly be?
Who knows, there is more than just one possibility and it’s up to you to prove it and tell me what exactly happened.
99.99% crashing on purpose or 0.01% of random disaster that just so happened to specifically happen at this time of year, at this time of day, in this part of the country, localized entirely within your kitchen?
Spyder is in such a sad sad state
Yet because Israeli players are somewhat competent, that means that the SPYDER will never be buffed
Yes, you need to prove it being malicious beyond reasonable doubt.
Other games dealt with this impossible thing by just applying penalties to all people that leave the game prematurely, as each leaving impacted the game in a negative way.
As I’ve said before - you don’t have to make a judgement on a single event. But if I start going through a player’s replays and see them doing it over and over again… How many times is their house gonna be set on fire? How many burglars are they going to confront just as they happen to see a missile coming for them, or an enemy suddenly showing up behind them?
Wilder things have happened so you still need to prove it. Flaw of your system is that at some point in time malicious actors would come out untouched.
You should treat all unnecessary game leavings the same way and just scale up the punishment with the amount of times people have done that.
Malicious actors would be punished at all times where others that were forced to leave (due to fire or something) wouldn’t even feel the cooldown, as they wouldn’t even play again in the next 5-10 minutes.
Apparently serial arson and burglary is very common in his city
Basically playing what the game expects you to do: Destroy targets if you’re good enough, and die to an enemy if you did a mistake or if an enemy has a tactical/strategic advantage over you. It’s not rocket science.
that’s more of a compelling argument. But things are being made to remedy the CAS situation at least in top tier, as we should expect more SPAAs in the near future.
That dude doesn’t cook a thing beyond its ego.
The easiest solution (in GRB) is to give J-out deaths to the nearest enemy, that way you alienate sweatlords from trolling out of simple frustration and just eat the L.
This can also be applied on Air Battles with a limited area of course, there’s no sense on be awarded with a 20ish miles kill if you haven’t even launched a missile to the target.
