Note on Match Infractions
If both teams in a given match are determined to have violated the rules during a match (i.e., "off-setting penalties"), TPG reserves the right to give forfeit losses to each team involved or request that the match be played.
Are there any sort of guidelines as to which option will be enforced?
Some rules are written to provide the Admin team some latitude. Although rigorously defining most every situation provides certainty, it limits our ability to respond appropriately to individual events. This particular rule has existed through TPG Hawken's entire history; I simply moved it to the fore. I'll post later about our Admins and our philosophy.
Is each map counted as a round or each match? If someones recording gets corrupted during a single scrim a 2-3 game suspension is overkill for punishment considering that's 1/3 of the entire season. Clarification would be nice between map, match, round, game, etc.
- Each map during a match is considered one round (best two rounds out of three format).
- We'll never demand scrim demos. That being said, our Anti-cheat team will act should someone record an obvious hacker during scrims.
- This thread serves only to notify participants about the penalties. We will not be debating their severity. I will note, though, that the previous penalties included 3- or 6-month suspensions depending on the number of rounds for which demos weren't recorded.
Banned Item/Banned Internal Infractions
- Repeat offenders will receive stricter penalties.
Any idea what these stricter penalties would be?
Scenario-dependent. Generally speaking, though, we would be looking at longer suspensions and regular demo pulls for the player in question.
Mech Restriction Infractions
Cases will be thoroughly reviewed by our Admin team. If infractions are determined to have been intentional and/or to have had a significant on the game, the following actions may be taken:
- Opponents may opt to replay the round(s) in question.
- Offenders will be suspended for one game.
Who exactly would be punished in these situations? All people playing mechs that break the rules or just the last person who spawns in a rule-breaking mech?
Excluding special circumstances (e.g., coordinated efforts to bypass our restrictions), penalties will target the person whose mech selection breaks the rule. If a team is running dual Sharpshooters, for instance, the person(s) whose selection brought twins to the field will be punished.
We recognize that teams sometimes accidentally select repeats - hence the wording differences between penalties for banned item/internals infractions and mech restriction infractions. Should you find yourself running twins, it's important that someone switches out asap. Do not wait. Commit "death by pilot error" or reconnect if necessary. Our admins will thoroughly investigate mech restriction infractions and determine a) whether doubling up affected round(s) outcome, and b) whether the infraction seems intentional. Suspensions will depend primarily on the latter factor.
Also installed OBS and adjusted to the recommended settings but for some reason I can't get it to record either. I may be using it incorrectly or need to refine the settings, at the moment I'm not in a position to record and stream.
You'll find a tutorial here.
I saw the second thread just made about video requirements after I posted this. Kind of understand the need to police cheaters but the random screening of several players screenshots and recording at request seems a bit extreme. It's just a videogame, not the NCAA.
As per the thread,
Recording Q&A
Q: Do you really think that anyone within Hawken's competitive community is cheating? Aren't you going a bit overboard?
A: Personally, I haven't witnessed anything suspicious during TPG matches. That being said, I've not spent much (match) time searching � and to be perfectly honest, cheaters would have to be pretty blatant to attract my attention during Omni matches.
Unfortunately, there are (almost) always individuals who turn toward cheating, whether out of frustration and apathy, or for amusement and personal gain. The fact that I haven't seen anyone cheating against my team does not exclude the possibility of cheaters.
Additionally, TPG must uphold certain standards of competitive play. We strive to create a safe, cheat-free space for community-based competition. As such, we must enact AC safeguards � especially when they're unavailable through the game itself. We must also ensure that our dispute resolution process is both thorough and fair � an endeavour that's made much easier through demo/recording availability.
Q: Couldn't TPG host matches on 13- or 14-man servers and require the presence of a recording spectator? Would that not suffice?
A: No, dedicated, recording spectators would not suffice. Their recordings would be limited to brief snippets of single players, or to bird's eye views of the battle. They could easily miss dispute-prompting events, and their (exclusive) use would dramatically decrease our AC capabilities. When disputes are filed, our Admin team pulls demos and screenshots from every relevant player. And when we're conducting AC activities, our Admin team watches the player(s) in question throughout the entire match.
Furthermore, requiring spectators would present logistical issues surrounding the vetting and availability of said spectators.
Q: What about . . .
A: No, sorry (eh). We require full recordings from each player, for each round, for each match.
Q: Can opposing captains agree to forego recording requirements before a match?
A: No, unfortunately not. Although I attempted to implement something similar during Season 1, we ultimately decided against it. Without recordings, arbitrating disputes between teams would become extremely difficult. As such, any non-recording rule would also preclude (most) dispute filing; and a league without a means of filing and resolving disputes could quickly descend into anarchy. While this risk was relatively low during the league's (Hawken) inception, its likelihood increases alongside our rising team and participant counts. There's also the risk that teams could be coerced into agreements � something which seems somewhat likely given the infrequency of ringer refusals. Finally, any non-recording arrangements would circumvent our random AC sweeps, rendering cheating much easier.
I understand that participants may think these procedures and penalties overly harsh. However, our requirements will not change.
Edited by God-King Nept, 02 July 2015 - 05:38 PM.