Posts from Online Lobby

If you stare at Wlk777 for too long, Wlk777 will start staring back at you.

If you don't analyze anything, but rather skim through everything and make decisions solely based on ingrained, stereotypical behavioral patterns, including prioritizing sarcasm over the pursuit of truth, you become part of a society that is, in its essence, far worse than any hypothetical Warlock.

Is throwing accusations the behavior of a healthy and intelligent person? He's a cheater, I know it for sure, so I won't play against him anymore.
Some people in the lobby reported Brabus to the blacklist just because FTS said on stream that Brabus is a cheater. I'll add him to my blacklist too...

There used to be a player in the lobby with the nickname Zloy or something similar; he did an analysis, and he was banned, but you don't do any analysis... you're just being unreasonable. Although, of course, it's great to think everyone is stupid; it makes life easier.

No saves, no problems.

Why everyone? Only those who are against me. With this gray nickname, they (from my point of view) insulted me much more than I insulted anyone with all sorts of inappropriate words in response. Everything is fair; it's silly for anyone to take offense.

Brabus is a well-known name, and it has been on many people's radar for a long time. Kostya may have been a bit too harsh in his words, but the fact remains: there is a fact.

I suggest that the CIS champion hold a show match, best-of-9, against the player Brabus, with judges from the Hota Crew. The motto of the match: "Let's use our skills to fight cheaters and quitters." P.S. All games must be played for rating points.

I played two games with Brabus, and I had some questions about his hero rotation. There are two possibilities: either he's a genius, or he's cheating. In personal communication, he didn't seem like a genius. And, in general, we only have one genius.

It’s like a headcount here. Kappa

Plans: for this winter:

...

And I'm still waiting for replays and an automated tournament system integrated into the online lobby. Is this something that's planned for the future, even if it's a distant one?

The fact remains that a person doesn't need any evidence to accuse another person of cheating. The presumption of innocence applies in the lobby. If you want to accuse Brabus of cheating, provide proof. If you suspect something, you can simply choose not to play with him. But to play with someone you suspect, accuse them of cheating during a specific game, and then not investigate... that's at least strange. That's why this action was considered a leave.

Man, I've missed so much interesting stuff... :D
Kostya is, of course, very heated and categorical in his words, but we just need to figure out the situation somehow. I see two points of contention:

1. The suspicious actions of a player who is indeed blacklisted by many—even I know about this, although I'm completely removed from the lobby drama. But still, there should be some concrete evidence for an accusation of cheating. Not just words. I remember how Lizard (and others) openly accused Homungulus after his defeat and finding the Dragon Utopia. But then everything fell into place. There is such a concept as the presumption of innocence, and it should apply. If you want to accuse—provide proof. If you don't want to provide proof—don't play with this player. I don't believe that pts in the lobby are so precious that people would leave a game.

2. The moderation of the HotA lobby. In my opinion, this is also a problem that exists. I know from experience that a moderator's job is unpaid and thankless. But that doesn't mean frequent complaints about moderation are normal. Perhaps it's worth recruiting a new set of moderators by putting out a call in the lobby and finding volunteers who have free time and are willing to help.

But that doesn't mean that frequent complaints about moderation are normal.

Are there any? Besides the two "scandals" with Lizard, I don't really remember anything major. And in Lizard's case, the evidence suggests that he has behavioral problems in the lobby, so it's natural that he will eventually "get himself into trouble" (fortunately, the punishments are now temporary, and the gray mark does not block the ability to play in the lobby). I have nothing against Lizard as a person, but his fame and connections with other top players do not give him any special rights or protection from punishments in the lobby.

To come to the conclusion that a new team of random volunteers will work better than the current one, you need evidence that the moderation is terrible.

Regarding moderation (administration): I have contacted them several times about cheaters (saves from HotA with the date and reason indicated) and quitters (screenshots of the chat), and I always received a reasonable and effective response.

Added 4 minutes later
Regarding the situation: I see a possible solution to the problem with a specific person (on high-level maps, Brabus is perhaps the only "controversial" player) as follows (the essence of the situation is that it is difficult to provide strict proof of cheating in maphacking):
1. The administration requests Brabus's saves (we will only consider ranked games). Most likely, cheating refers to maphacking to find the best possible join locations (the main complaints are about Anarchy + Utopia).
I think it would be appropriate to assume that if a player has cheated several times, then he most likely cheated in the vast majority of his ranked games.
2. Converting Lizard's "argument" ("If the words of a number of experienced players, who truly understand the game and have not colluded with each other, but express their opinions independently, based on a real individual analysis of various situations") into the following scheme:
A commission of experienced players analyzes, for example, ten saves. If in each of them the player behaves inconsistently with scouting and always goes to the best possible join location, etc., then I think the probability that in all 10 games he was just lucky and he made a random, illogical decision is discarded.

Regarding moderation: I have contacted them several times regarding cheaters (saves from Hotalevers, specifying the day and reason) and leavers (screenshots of the correspondence), and I always received a clear and effective response.

At this moment, moderators are not responsible for leavers and cheaters because we simply cannot do anything about them on our own. Most of us (if not all) don't even have access to Hotalevers, not that it would matter if we did. At best, we can either directly message a leaver if he is online when we get the report or pass the information on to administrators if they are available; otherwise, we can only redirect people to the email. Basically, our role in the lobby boils down to clearing chats, answering questions about rules/the game itself, sending people the email address, and serving as an outlet for frustrated players. Occasionally, I also get to check saves of people who are suspected of cheating, but as far as I know, I'm an exception, at least on the Polish side.