Which isn’t the situation the OP is in. I have seen those threads too, they exist. If someone says I didn’t do X, and then shows they did X then that’s another situation entirely. There’s just as many threads out there where someone gets banned and later comes back saying it got overturned. Because false flags do happen.
Watching Netflix on a second monitor isn’t an actionable offense.
The problem I see for actioning people for defending was highlighted by Vrakthris in that other thread linked. Vrakthris told him towers aren’t meant to be held solo, even though one could easily argue that while it’s risky, it’s a good insurance policy to have because as we all know that people will try to solo retake towers and sometimes that single person defending is what makes or break the tower burning.
What I gathered from his posts was that he seemed to hint that due to the way that current AV is being played defending towers isn’t actually something a reasonable person would consider as a valuable contribution to the game. I actually just hopped into an AV, and we did need people defending towers in IW and SH, but we killed Vann before the others got close to capping. Actually I tried to defend the south tower just in case, but then realized they were melting Vann so oopsies on my part. The biggest problem with these types of bans is that it encourages people not to defend for fear of repercussion even if they feel like it would be beneficial to the game. And this ultimately means that Blizzard is telling us “You’re not playing right” rather than “We caught you intentionally trying to not play”
Personally I would say that finding malice in a player’s actions is far more important than nailing people for inaction due to incompetence. The people who should be actioned are the people who are continuously not interacting with anyone in the game despite when they are given opportunity to do so.
He is a rogue I think that is reason enough to assume that the ban was justified. When I done AV in vanilla classic all they were doing is stealth on hills behind trees or just inside of people leeching. Just don’t get caught :^)
And legitimate flags also do happen, I’m generally more inclined to side with blizzard unless it a case of some system issue that is auto banning people. And in the case of the OP it wasn’t overturned.
Nope, but sitting in a tower playing “defense” by hitting the space bar every minute or two is.
While this is normally the case, his M.O. does not match OP’s.
He types very well where as OP does not capitalize nor bother to spell out words.
Though he is putting quite a lot of effort into defending this person.
Very likely OP was AFKing. No ones going to report people AFK in the boss room when there’s active opposition outside the door. My guess is he just booked it there and sat on Drek when there wasn’t even anything going on.
I love reporting people AFK in AV. They think they are so clever. Enjoy your punishment, OP.
I am also inclined to believe authoritarian figures at first glance as well, but I think it’s also important that when the accused cry foul to listen to them and try to ascertain the situation based on the credibility of the post. In the real world cops claim X and then bodycam or civilian footage directly disproves it, but that doesn’t mean all cops are bad or that I’m going to start believing cops are bad from the start. In this case we don’t have access to that type of information so all we really do is just assume the system is working.
I’d rather delete my account than name a character along the lines of the OP’s.
One of the perks of being on PTO until the 3rd so I’m just sitting here playing Stardew Valley while I post whenever I feel like. I have no idea if this person is guilty or not. I said exactly what they should do for their situation if it’s actually true and left it at that. Based on the way Vrakthris it seems like he’s out.
Personally when I see multiple people coming out with the same line of “I was playing, I was defending, I was suiciding trying to stall them, etc” like we have seen doesn’t pass the sniff test for people trying to cheat the system, but that’s just my opinion. When you think about it there is a system that is actively trying to pick up the AFKers who never contribute anything to any game, so it’s not outlandish to assume people legitimately trying to defend could get caught up in that system. And now we have that thread with Vrakthris who seems to be kind of confirming to watch out for how you strategize in a game, which reeks of Blizzard telling us how to play.
Again, just my opinion, but Blizzard should be targeting people who actively attempt to not participate, not banning people who always defend SH or IW bunkers, but since they rarely get attacked they only see action once every 3 or 4 games.
So before I read the blue post I wont lie I would say meh, afk oh well. After reading that blue post I dont really understand what they wouldnt consider non participation. Seems pretty arbitrary. Blue made it sound like if you dont do what the majority of the team wants you are not participating. Regardless of the action. Is doing the quest to get the insignia non participation? It doesnt help your team at all.
I always defend towers or backcap and I have never had any of these issues of being reported AFK.
So listening to someone else claim that they play AV exactly like I do, but they get Bans for being reported afk. Makes me not believe them.
Chances are if you go into one game (maybe two if you don’t get it all done) to do some sort of non-participation content like the insignia you’re probably going to be fine, but by the looks of Vrak’s post I mean he basically implied that failure to participate every so often in BGs gets logged and it sounds like they take that into account and that seems incredibly arbitrary. Is 9 out of 10 games good enough to get overlooked? What about four out of five? What rate of failure to participate will end up getting you actioned if you’re reported enough, and apparently stripped of all your honor?